3 ms·

> who don't want to fork over a 30% tax to Apple a) It's 15% for most developers and not a tax by any definition. b) It only applies to applications which acc

> who don't want to fork over a 30% tax to Apple a) It's 15% for most developers and not a tax by any definition. b) It only applies to applications which accept money from users. c) No government has ever said that Apple is not entitled to this. d) You would have to be crazy to think Apple will allow b) without them being compensated. What is likely to happen is that Apple will have a Payment API that you as a developer will need to call every time you accept a payment. They will then bill you for the 15% each month and ban you for non-payment. And reconciliation is easy because they can simply download your app, trigger a payment and make sure they see a corresponding request for their API.

compsciphd 5y ago
if games work in browsers, then they would have to ban the browser, which would presumably run afoul of these rules....
- threeseed 5y ago
  I think you're confused. There are two ways to distribute applications: 1) Create a website and ask users to open it in Safari/Chrome. You have not benefited from Apple's technologies nor customer base that they acquired. You used your tools, you acquired your customers and so Apple claims no commission. 2) Create an app that is a wrapper around WebKit/Chromium. For this case you have used Apple's technologies (e.g. Swift/XCode) and you are benefitting from Apple's customer base (via the App Store). Whether you download the app from the App Store or a third party store is irrelevant. From Apple's perspective you still owe the 15-30% commission. And as I mentioned below this is not hypothetical. It's exactly what happened in Netherlands.
  - hedora 5y ago
    3) Tell your users to install the free unreal browser if they want a discount and cross-platform support.
aaomidi 5y ago
This wouldn't be acceptable under the spirit of these regulations. And definitely wouldn't be acceptable to a lot of us. If apple wants, they can split their OS and their phones if they want to "make money for writing an OS". At the same time that'd also obligate them to make it possible to install android OS on their hardware. But yeah no, apple does not "deserve" a percentage of your revenue because they have written the OS and don't let you switch the OS. Imagine arguing Microsoft should charge people x% of every software sale because they write the OS.
- threeseed 5y ago
  > This wouldn't be acceptable under the spirit of these regulations You clearly haven't been paying attention to the EU regulations. Because it is exactly in the spirit of them and what Apple did in response to Dutch authorities demanding third payment providers [1]. They got their 15-30% either way. And it is completely normal for Apple to have a commission on application purchases made on their platform. It's no different to how many websites e.g. Shopify or hardware e.g. Playstation work. [1] https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl...
  - aaomidi 5y ago
    I have been. And I expect apple to get in a lot of trouble over the decision with NL. I actually wouldn't be surprised if we saw a huge % of global revenue fine for that. And apple would deserve it.

compsciphd 5y ago

if games work in browsers, then they would have to ban the browser, which would presumably run afoul of these rules....

threeseed 5y ago
I think you're confused. There are two ways to distribute applications: 1) Create a website and ask users to open it in Safari/Chrome. You have not benefited from Apple's technologies nor customer base that they acquired. You used your tools, you acquired your customers and so Apple claims no commission. 2) Create an app that is a wrapper around WebKit/Chromium. For this case you have used Apple's technologies (e.g. Swift/XCode) and you are benefitting from Apple's customer base (via the App Store). Whether you download the app from the App Store or a third party store is irrelevant. From Apple's perspective you still owe the 15-30% commission. And as I mentioned below this is not hypothetical. It's exactly what happened in Netherlands.
- hedora 5y ago
  3) Tell your users to install the free unreal browser if they want a discount and cross-platform support.

aaomidi 5y ago

This wouldn't be acceptable under the spirit of these regulations. And definitely wouldn't be acceptable to a lot of us. If apple wants, they can split their OS and their phones if they want to "make money for writing an OS". At the same time that'd also obligate them to make it possible to install android OS on their hardware. But yeah no, apple does not "deserve" a percentage of your revenue because they have written the OS and don't let you switch the OS. Imagine arguing Microsoft should charge people x% of every software sale because they write the OS.

threeseed 5y ago
> This wouldn't be acceptable under the spirit of these regulations You clearly haven't been paying attention to the EU regulations. Because it is exactly in the spirit of them and what Apple did in response to Dutch authorities demanding third payment providers [1]. They got their 15-30% either way. And it is completely normal for Apple to have a commission on application purchases made on their platform. It's no different to how many websites e.g. Shopify or hardware e.g. Playstation work. [1] https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl...
- aaomidi 5y ago
  I have been. And I expect apple to get in a lot of trouble over the decision with NL. I actually wouldn't be surprised if we saw a huge % of global revenue fine for that. And apple would deserve it.